Background: We examined a large cohort of patients who had interdigital neurectomy and evaluated their clinical outcomes by using a previously developed scoring system as well as a visual analog scale (VAS). In addition, we wanted to identify risk factors that may lead to poorer outcomes.
Materials and methods: A retrospective review identified 232 patients who had neuroma excision between 1994 and 2004, after failure of conservative treatment. Each patient was contacted via mail and given a Neuroma Clinical Evaluation Score survey as well as a visual analog score. Each patient received a unique identification number, allowing the evaluation process to be single-blinded.
Results: Of the 232 patients contacted, 120 (52%) returned their completed surveys. The average Giannini neuroma score was 53: 61 feet (51%) had good or excellent results, 12 (10%) had fair results, and 48 (40%) had poor results. The average VAS score was 2.5. The only significant (p = 0.027) difference in outcome was the location of the neuroma: second webspace had worse outcomes than third webspace neuromas on both the VAS and neuroma score.
Conclusion: This retrospective review identified location in the second webspace as a possible prognostic indicator of poor outcome, but the more important finding may be that outcomes of neuroma excision do not appear to be as successful at long-term followup as previously reported.